Forwarding ban riles many

By Jane Musgrave

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Confusing, inaccurate or nonexistent information, computer problems and just plain old human error are likely to blame for thousands of Palm Beach County voters' failing to receive absentee ballots they requested in November's presidential election.

Although conspiracy theories still swirl around the election that produced a record number of absentee votes, a Palm Beach Post review of nearly 4,000 absentee ballots uncovered a variety of logical, albeit disturbing, reasons for the meltdown that baffled elections officials.

Although many voters contacted in the past month said they ultimately got to vote, exercising that basic right required a herculean effort that ultimately soured them on the democratic process.

And the injury is still raw for those who were unable to vote because they never got their absentee ballots.

"This one I particularly wanted to vote in," said 87-year-old Boynton Beach resident Hilda Hausner, whose ballot never arrived at her New York address. "It was probably a bunch of dunderheads taking care of things that an eighth-grader could do. It's just in the hands of incompetent people."

Although people are quick to blame former Elections Supervisor Theresa LePore, a variety of factors contributed to delays that ultimately kept hundreds from getting their ballots in on time to be counted.

Because of the way elections officials keep records, it's impossible to determine exactly how many absentee ballots were requested, mailed or returned. The computer program that tracks voting lumps absentee ballots together with early voting, and postal records don't necessarily include all the ballots that were mailed.

Before leaving office, LePore estimated that about 100,000 absentee ballots were requested and roughly 91,600 votes were cast. That is nearly double the number cast four years earlier.

But despite the inability to determine how many ballots were mailed, a few certainties did emerge from the review of 2,094 ballots that were returned to the elections office as undeliverable and 1,064 that were returned too late to be counted. The Post also reviewed 569 ballots that were rejected because of signature problems.

The most conspicuous problem was that many voters were unaware that absentee ballots can't legally be forwarded.

If the prohibition didn't exist, the vast majority of the 2,094 ballots that were returned as undeliverable would have made it to voters. In most cases, the post office had the voters' new or temporary addresses, but were legally prohibited from sending it to them.

A smaller, but still significant, number of ballots were returned because they were mailed to the wrong address. Like the Elvis song, many were stamped: Address unknown, no such number or no such zone.

In some cases, voters clearly hadn't alerted the elections office of their new addresses.

"Has not lived at this address in 14 years per court order," was scrawled across one returned ballot.

In other cases, house numbers were transposed or the street address was correct but the city was wrong. Whether it was the voter's fault or the fault of election workers is impossible to determine.

The Post review also revealed minor problems with the election office's ability to cull its records. For instance, 27 absentee ballots came back stamped "deceased." Another 30 were returned because the envelope was stuffed improperly and no address was showing.

But the review also found that voters were equally, if not more, absent-minded. Of the 569 absentee ballots that were thrown out because of signature problems, 393 were an easy call: The voters failed to sign their ballots.

Still, some voters went to extraordinary, expensive and ultimately unsuccessful lengths to vote. Nearly 50 of the 1,064 ballots that arrived in the elections office after Election Day were sent by Express Mail, most at $13.65 a pop.

More than one voter attached notes, explaining that their ballots arrived late.

"Did not receive material until Nov. 1 when I got home at 5 p.m. Too late to send it out that day," wrote voter Bruce Morrell, who Express-Mailed the ballot from New Paltz, N.Y. It arrived on Nov. 3, the day after the election, and was tossed in a box ? never to be counted.

The underlying frustration of Morrell's plea was reflected in the voices of many of the more than 50 voters interviewed and on sticky notes penned by others.

Even those who scoff at conspiracy theories said their anger was fueled by not being able to find out what happened to their ballots and the overwhelming feeling that elections workers didn't care.

"My husband made five phone calls to straighten out the address," said Boca Raton resident Kathleen Long, whose ballot was mailed repeatedly to her old address.

The couple's ballots finally arrived two days before the election, forcing her to stand in line at the elections office to it off.

"I ordered it because it's easier ? allegedly it's easier," she said. "I tell you though ? wow ? it was a debacle."

Absentee onslaught

Debacle is a favorite word to describe the election process. The word, in fact, became inextricably linked to election four years ago when LePore's now infamous butterfly ballot was blamed for keeping Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore out of the White House.

Haunted by visions of that razor-thin election and bombarded with talk about the unreliability of electronic voting machines, requests for absentee ballots began pouring in.

Although LePore and other election supervisors insisted they could handle the looming onslaught, it became clear early on that their cheery predictions were less than perfect.

Telephone lines at elections offices became jammed with callers demanding to know why they hadn't received ballots they ordered months before.

Although the level of vitriol was similar, the way various elections offices handled mounting complaints varied dramatically, a situation that was supposed to be corrected by reforms enacted in the wake of the 2000 election.

While Broward County's election chief called for a criminal investigation when workers detected a pattern of missing ballots, LePore said her workers were too busy to analyze the reasons ballots were delayed.

They were busy answering phone calls from angry voters. Voters said when they were finally able to reach elections workers, they were never told the ballots couldn't be forwarded.

"I can see why it wasn't forwarded, but I wish someone had told me," said Wellington resident Victoria Eisele, who called LePore's office twice from her part-time home in New Jersey to inquire about her ballot.

Others insisted that, when they called, they were assured the ballot would be forwarded to their summer homes in the North.

Nothing on LePore's or the Florida Division of Elections' Web sites or brochures warned voters that absentee ballots can't be forwarded.

Pasco County Elections Supervisor Kurt Browning said he has a policy in place to partly address the problem.

When ballots were returned to his office because they couldn't be forwarded, he said, he alerted the voters by postcard and urged them to contact his office.

"It keeps us from getting yelled at and cussed at," he said of the policy he enacted years ago.

Oregon, where everyone votes by mail, uses a similar process.

John Kauffman, elections director in Multnomah County in Portland, said he routinely gets back 4 percent to 6 percent of the county's 400,000 ballots as undeliverable.

His workers sort through them and, when it appears to be a forwarding problem, sends postcards to voters so they can give the office their correct address. Unlike Florida, Oregon allows voters to their addresses through Election Day.

Browning, who is legislative director of the Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections, said supervisors have long debated whether ballots should be forwarded.

One problem is that voters who move within a county could get the wrong ballot since most elected officials represent specific geographic areas.

While LePore said nothing would be done with ballots that were returned as undeliverable or those that arrived late, other election officials said they review them so they can correct problems with election rolls.

Evelyn Ruiz, the office's new absentee ballot coordinator, said she wants to send notices to voters to get to the root of problems that could resurface in future elections. She has changed a brochure so it now clearly states that absentee ballots can't be forwarded. New Elections Supervisor Arthur Anderson said he supports Ruiz's idea. "We should do anything we can to get to the bottom of what happened," he said.

Others argue that it is up to voters to keep the elections office informed of address changes. If the ballot ends up in the dead mail pile because of an incorrect address, they argue, it is the voter's fault.

'Logistical acrobatics'

Still, many of those who failed to get their absentee ballots insist they did give LePore's office their correct addresses.

Excited about the prospect of voting in her first presidential election, 21-year-old Lake Worth resident ElizaBeth Fincannon ordered an absentee ballot in August to be sent to Boston, where she attends Emerson College.

When it didn't arrive, she called the office to inquire about the holdup. She was told the office had no record she ever requested the ballot. The worker she talked to said the office had experienced trouble with its online registration form.

The worker took down her Boston address, and records show it was mailed on Oct. 23. Fincannon said it arrived on Election Day.

"I was so angry," she said. "I have been waiting to vote in this election since I was 18 and first registered to vote."

If there were problems with the Web site, elections officials should have posted a notice online so voters would have known to make another request, Fincannon said.

LePore said she was unaware of any problems with the Web site.

Debbie Karp of Palm Beach Gardens didn't use the election office's Web site to order absentee ballots for her sons but said she experienced similar problems.

She said she called LePore's office months before the election and gave them her sons' college addresses. There is no record of her request.

Ultimately, Karp paid to have her sons Express Mail letters to her that allowed her to pick up their ballots. Then, she Express Mailed the ballots to them and they Express Mailed them to the election office so they would arrive on Nov. 2.

"Does the average voter have the resources in time, persistence and moneys to perform these logistical acrobatics?" she said. "I am sure the answer to this is no."

Like Fincannon and Karp, many voters said they ordered ballots months before the election. But election records show they ordered ballots in late October.

Further, because of the way the elections office keeps its records, it's impossible to know how many ballots were mailed or returned, much less figure out if a box got shoved into a back room of a post office and forgotten ? an oft-mentioned scenario that postal officials vehemently reject.

Those who have tried to analyze the election in hopes of suggesting reforms said the lack of accurate information is maddening.

"I am absolutely convinced there is a problem," said Randall Marshall, an ACLU attorney. "Exactly what that problem is I'm not sure." Jorge Mursuli, director of the Florida chapter of People for the American Way, said he hopes public hearings his organization is holding around the state will help shed light on bureaucratic problems that disenfranchised tens of thousands of voters throughout the state.

Most of the problems can be resolved simply, he said. Voters should be given complete information, election workers should be properly trained and, he said, most importantly, procedures should be uniform from county to county.

"Let's take out all the nonsense and make things happen," he said.